Damien English (Meath West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank the House for an opportunity to address this issue. I acknowledge the work that Senator O'Sullivan is doing in this area and the expertise she brings to it. Generally we agree on most things and we certainly agree on where we want to end up. That is the reason I am disappointed with some aspects of the motion and, in particular, to the approach that has been taken online. The reason I know the number who signed the petition is that I track it and most of them contact me after they sign it, because that is what the petition asks them to do. That is fine.

The motion that is online that people are asked to read and to sign is different from the motion put forward in the House tonight. The two motions do not match up. I do not like that way of doing politics. I think people should know exactly what they are voting for. The motions do not add up. The online motion, supported by the Green Party, to which people sign up is very different from what is being put forward in the House tonight. The intentions and desires are the same and we all share them, but I am a little disappointed by the way the online petition is different and that is not a good way to do business.

I recognise Senator Grace O'Sullivan's expertise in this area and that she is genuine in trying to work in this area. She was one of the first to raise the need for legislation to prohibit microbeads. I held a different brief at that time and I took a debate on the issue of microbeads in the Seanad. At that stage I outlined to the Senator that we agreed with the concept but that the Government had to go through a certain process to be able to do that. We have gone through that process and we have notified every body, because we are part of a European project and the legislation should be with Cabinet before the summer and come to the Oireachtas as well. I acknowledge that this is as a result of Senator O'Sullivan's work. When we can agree, we certainly do agree.

It is not a case of opposing a matter for the sake of opposing, but I cannot accept this motion and I do have to oppose it because we could not support all the issues that are encompassed in it. I hope the Senator will understand the reason for this position by the end of my speech. I will certainly be happy to engage with the Senator. I appreciate that she wanted to engage with me this week but there was no time on my side to do that.

I have to disagree with Senator Paul Daly because many of the actions are in motion and Ireland is very much involved at European and international levels and is playing a leading role. It would not be correct to say there was no action. Senator Daly may nod his head in disagreement but I know the officials who are here behind me and the hard work they are doing on the issues for a number of years. We also have teams in Cork and Wexford and they, in conjunction with the Department, are working very hard on this matter. They take their work very seriously and are very committed to it. It would not be justifiable to say that nothing is happening, because that is not true. I know that Senator O'Sullivan is not saying that, but other Members are because they are not as informed as Senator O'Sullivan. It is fair enough that Senator O'Sullivan wants us to do more and I accept her credentials in looking for more.

Let me respond to Senator Ruane's point. She claimed some of our counter motion but did not give the full story. We are not just approaching this from a hard economics point of view. We are very clear on that point. It is important that the people who want to sign the petition and support the general thrust of it will read all the motions and will read the counter motion. I will not put it all on the record but I will give the opening paragraphs.

We acknowledge as a Government:

- that the Irish coastal and marine environment has a high natural capital and provide valuable services for all parts of the country and economy, including in the areas of tourism, heritage and cultural amenity, transportation and communications, food production, education and research, flood protection, climate regulation, nutrient absorption and energy;

- that, globally, the oceans are facing increased pressures, generated by the combined impacts of human activities and the effects of climate change;

- that Ireland, in co-operation with the European Union and other European countries within the framework of the OSPAR Convention, is committed to ensuring the protection and conservation of the marine environment and the sustainable use of its resources;

- that Ireland is committed to an ecosystem-based approach to the sound management of the marine environment and recognises that marine ecosystems, species and habitats are largely transboundary in nature, thus making regional and cross-sectoral co-operation essential for effective management.

It continues. I ask Members to desist from saying that the Government focus is only on hard economics because that would not be true. That would be a failure to recognise the work that the country is doing and which is paid for by our taxpayers.

The motion refers to the importance of involving stakeholder engagement. That is what we do in all our work. It is actually laid out in the marine strategy directive to which we have signed up that we have to have community and stakeholder involvement in all our consultations. That is another reason that I cannot accept this motion because the Government has to go through all the process to set targets and goals. It would be wrong to come to the House, discuss them and set them.

As part of the stakeholder engagement, we also have to recognise that the potential in the marine protected areas has to be based on robust scientific information. We have to go through an assessment when we are setting them. It is not a case of picking a percentage figure out of the sky. I accept that Senator O'Sullivan is not suggesting that but others are quoting figures. The Government has to go through a process to assess any marine protected area. We are involved in that process and we are committed to doing that. Let me repeat we are committed to scientific assessment and stakeholder engagement. We try to do that in all our work in this area because we try to bring people with us.

We published an issues paper on our marine strategy in December 2017. I chaired an initial workshop about six weeks ago. There is a very strong working group comprising all the stakeholders. There have been a number of public sessions. Senator O'Sullivan attended one of those sessions this week in County Wexford. That process is under way and I am happy to have a debate on it in this House. This would highlight the work we are focusing on as a Government and the interest of all parties in this area. We will involve everybody as much as we possibly can.

My colleague, Senator Coffey, informed the House that the Government supports the development of a diverse but coherent network of marine protected areas. We have already committed to introducing enabling legislation to provide for them. We are acutely aware of our position regarding marine protected areas, the necessity to legislate and to designate them. Today's motion is not one which the Government can support and the Green Party is aware of some of the reasons as I have outlined but also from previous discussions and debates we have had in this House. Some of it goes beyond the scope of Government , as we must go through a process at European level to be able to do that.

I have been asked by a number of Members to outline the proposed legislation that the Government will bring forward.We wanted to get the microbeads legislation published first, which we will do before the summer. We can continue to bring forward legislation in this area after that, maybe in the summer or autumn and also in autumn 2019. We all want to do it as quickly as possible and we are committed to doing so. It is not a case of just setting aside debating time in here, though that is important. There is a lot of work involved in putting the legislation together. We have a team of people who work very hard but cannot do everything on day one. Extra people have been employed in the section but the microbeads legislation is being brought forward because this House led the charge on the issue and we are responding to that, as we will do in respect of the whole area.

The Green Party wants the Government to introduce legislation to designate 50% of Ireland's territorial waters as a marine protected area. It appears the party wants to unilaterally force this decision on both the Government and all those using the marine area. A policy decision of this magnitude needs to be researched and thought out and stakeholders need to be informed and their voices and opinions heard. I imagine the Green Party intends that but the motion does not say it. It calls for the 50% designation but we cannot do that without going through the whole process. To designate even a small area as a marine protected area needs to be thought through, considering the objective of the designation, the expected outcomes and how it would be managed and enforced. It is important that we can manage areas we designate as such and that it has an impact. It is not a case of picking 30% or 35%, as in the amendment, because it has to mean something and not just on paper. We have to be able to back it up and know how we enforce it and manage it. It is not enough to just put in a figure.

The Green Party wishes to take a policy decision of great magnitude to designate an area approximately five times the size of Ireland's land mass without any research or consultation. The motion uses the word "significant" but the area is five times our land mass and this needs proper negotiation, as well as a study of the scientific data. Accordingly, I cannot agree with this proposal although it does not detract from our stated position of introducing legislation for the MPAs. I and the Government fully recognise the need for MPAs but a unilateral declaration of 50% of the marine area is not the way to garner support for the measure.

The motion also seeks Government agreement to a moratorium on the granting of licences for deep sea mining and the exploration of fossil fuels. We have had many debates on this and the Green Party is well informed of the Government's position on matters relating to climate action energy and offshore exploration. There was a large discussion on the recent Solidarity-People Before Profit Private Members' Bill, the Petroleum and Other Minerals Development (Climate Emergency Measures) Bill 2017, in which the Government set out its position and I will not use all my time tonight setting it out again.

We are also being asked to look for a change in the quota system set out in the Common Fisheries Policy. The Common Fisheries Policy already allows for the incorporation of marine protected areas within Irish waters, with consultation from other member states. Our quota distribution needs to conform to the requirements set down in the Common Fisheries Policy. Ireland cannot unilaterally make changes to the quota distribution rules, though we can do it when the time is right.

There is also a request for a major reorganisation of the way the Government manages marine matters into a single Department structure. Responsibility for marine management is divided across various Departments and the marine co-ordination group has the role of supervision, cross-Government delivery and implementation of Ireland's integrated marine plan, Harnessing our Ocean Wealth. It is the intention of Government that this integrated approach will continue. There are often calls for one Department to deal with this but it is important we involve all the different Departments who have a say in it and the marine co-ordination group does this quite effectively. I consult them on any decisions I have to make on behalf of Government on licensing, leases and so on. Some Members may not be familiar with our integrated marine plan to harness ocean wealth but I ask them to read it, where they will see the involvement of all stakeholders and other players.

As the Senator will be aware, my Department is committed to introducing enabling legislation to allow for the formal creation and management of marine protected areas. I know the motion is about getting it more quickly and we would like to bring it forward more quickly too, but we have had to deal with other legislation including the overall strategy for the marine. The Government and I are deeply committed to the development of primary legislation to provide for the creation of a network of marine protected areas in accordance with the requirements of the marine strategy framework directive and other international commitments. Our objective is to enact legislation for the designation and protection of marine protected areas to deliver an ecologically coherent, connected and well-managed network of MPAs which, by the nature of marine ecosystems, are transboundary and consistent with the target for effectively conserved marine coastal ecological regions under the convention on biological diversity. This legislation and the process of the identification of potential MPAs will be based on robust scientific information on habitats, species, heritage sites and geological and geomorphological features. We have to go through that process. It is a means to an end but we have to go through the process and I hope Members understand that.

The Bill we are drafting will allow for the designation of various types of MPA by regulation, including the geographical delineations and the provision of the necessary special protection measures required by the MPA in question. These regulations will identify what human activities, if any, need to be managed, limited or allowed in each potential MPA and will identify the time periods when restrictions will apply. As the marine strategy framework directive is also concerned with the sustainable use of our marine environment, social and cultural factors will also be a consideration. Senator Ruane made a point that it was not just about economics and I am clear about this. We are committed to it and a European strategy commits us to it, so even future Governments will be committed to doing it.

Stakeholder contribution is a very important process with any proposed legislation and I wish to reassure the Senator that there will be consultation at national and local community level on all aspects of MPAs. However, MPAs are not simply a matter of their designation, as the Senator's motion implies. There are a number of other critical questions to be considered. The same is true of the 30% amendment; it is not just about picking a number. We have to decide what kind of marine protection measures are required and where they should be located. Why are we designating them? What are we protecting and what form of restriction is needed? Who will enforce the MPAs, have responsibility for their ongoing and overall management and have a budget to do so? What penalties should be in place in order for them to be meaningful? I recognise the Senator is genuine about this but I am setting out the process of bringing about the legislation to achieve it.

I want to ensure that this proposed legislation will provide a strong basis to deal with all of these issues although today’s motion offers little in respect of these issues. The motion was designed to frame the discussion but does not go into the detail, though we will have the chance to debate the legislation in here and in committee. People have referred to 2030 targets and 2020 targets but the purpose of any area designated should be to ensure that we are able to reach our good environmental status, GES, targets under the MSFD. An expert advisory group will also be established under the MPA legislation to make recommendations for candidate designations and I look forward to engaging with it at the earliest opportunity.

In terms of the current level of MPAs mentioned in the motion, a significant number of protected areas have been designated under the EU birds and habitats directives. These include a number of special areas of conservation and special protected areas. The proposed legislation intends that new types of marine special protection measures will be added to the existing measures and, over time, provide for the designation of a coherent and representative network of marine protected areas.

As I already stated, Ireland is actively involved on the international stage and in this capacity has ensured that the level of MPAs in the north-east Atlantic continues to expand. The OSPAR intermediate assessment documents the increase of MPAs and advises that considerable progress has been made towards an ecologically-coherent and well-managed MPA network within the OSPAR maritime area.

I was asked about the marine strategy framework directive. My Department is responsible for national marine environmental policy in Ireland, which is principally achieved through the implementation of the marine strategy framework directive, MSFD. The MSFD forms the basis of our sustainable interaction with our marine environment. The purpose of the MSFD is to integrate environmental considerations into all aspects of marine policy and activity in order that we maintain or reach a point of good environmental status in our seas and oceans and, thereafter, that we ensure that this status is maintained through sustainable use of our seas. The MSFD requires that we assess our marine environment, develop GES targets and indicators, monitor our environment in light of these, and, where necessary, introduce a programme of measures, including marine protection measures, to address issues affecting GES being achieved. Key to any successful programme of measures is ensuring that we have a coherent and effective network of marine protected areas and other spatial protection measures across all the EU’s marine regions. This is also a reason for not accepting the amendment to the motion.

Other issues were raised but I do not have the time to address them. I will come back to Senators on individual questions.I wish I could come back in but am conscious of the time. I will come back to the individual questions.